India Trademark Cases
3,740 decisions indexed
Page 86 of 125 · 3,740 total
Sun Pharma Laboratories Ltd v.Intas Pharmaceuticals Ltd
The Delhi High Court dismissed Sun Pharma's appeal against a lower court order that denied an interim injunction. Sun Pharma sought protection for its registered trademark 'BEVETEX' against Intas Pharmaceuticals' use of 'BEVATAS,' alleging infringement and passing off in the pharmaceutical sector. The court found no prima facie case for infringement, noting that while both drugs are cancer treatments, their trade dress and administration methods were not remotely similar. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed.
Bennett, Coleman And Company Limited. v.Global India Entertainment Production
The Bombay High Court addressed an interim application seeking a temporary injunction against the unauthorized use of 'Miss India' and 'Mr. India' by defendants organizing similar beauty pageants. The court found that while the words themselves are generic, their combination with other elements creates distinctiveness, supporting the plaintiffs' claim of trademark infringement and passing off. Although the initial relief was not granted immediately, the court allowed the defendants to propose concrete modifications to their titles for future consideration.
Shyam Steel Industries Limited v.Shyam Sel And Power Limited & Anr.
This Calcutta High Court judgment addresses a trademark infringement and passing off suit filed by Shyam Steel Industries Limited against Shyam Sel And Power Limited. The plaintiff alleged that the defendants were exploiting its reputation by using 'Shyam' on their TMT bar packaging, despite previous agreements to phase out the mark. However, the court noted the defendant's claim of honest adoption and the common nature of the word 'Shyam'. Consequently, the court declined to grant an immediate injunction but allowed the defendants time to file a detailed affidavit-in-opposition.
Tamil Nadu Liquor Manufacturers Welfare Association v.Dijit Kumar, Mount Everest Breweries Ltd., The Commissioner, Madhya Pradesh State Excise Department
The Tamil Nadu Liquor Manufacturers Welfare Association filed a civil suit against several defendants, including Mount Everest Breweries Ltd., alleging infringement and passing off of their trademarked logos such as “UB”, “SNJ”, “KALS”, “APPOLLO”, and “AM”. The plaintiffs sought damages and permanent injunctions to protect the goodwill associated with these marks. However, before the court could proceed further, the plaintiff chose to withdraw the suit.
M/s.Rui Boutique v.Nidhi Arora
The Bombay High Court disposed of a commercial IP suit between Rui Boutique and Nidhi Arora based on mutually agreed-upon consent terms. The settlement allowed the defendant to change her existing trademark and trade name, which the plaintiff accepted. This resolution brought an end to the litigation concerning the intellectual property dispute.
Hindustan Unilever Limited v.Sree Annapoorna Foods
Hindustan Unilever Limited appealed an order that allowed Sree Annapoorna Foods to amend its plaint to include a claim for rendition of accounts. The appellant argued that this amendment changed the nature of the suit and was contrary to Section 135 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999. The Madras High Court dismissed the appeal, agreeing with the single judge's finding that the amendment did not fundamentally alter the character of the original infringement and passing off suit.
Relish Snacks Pvt Ltd. v.M/S.Virchow Biotech Pvt.
The Madras High Court dismissed the trade mark infringement suit filed by Relish Snacks Pvt Ltd. against M/S.Virchow Biotech Pvt. The court held that since the plaintiff had not obtained a registered trademark, but only pending applications, the claim for infringement was premature and lacked cause of action. Furthermore, the defendant successfully argued that neither party was the registered proprietor of their respective marks, leading to the suit's dismissal.
Dubai Islamic Bank v.Union Of India & Ors.
The Delhi High Court overturned the refusal of trademark registration for 'Dubai Islamic Bank - The Better Way To Bank'. The court found that the Senior Examiner had incorrectly applied a foreign judgment, failing to consider the composite nature of the mark (including the slogan) and established Indian legal principles. Consequently, the matter was remanded back to the Registrar of Trade Marks for fresh consideration, ensuring the Petitioner's arguments regarding existing registrations and global use are properly evaluated.
M/s.Kaleesuwari Refinery Private Limited v.M/s.Sri Vetrivel Traders
M/s.Kaleesuwari Refinery Private Limited filed a civil suit against M/s.Sri Vetrivel Traders alleging trademark infringement, passing-off, and copyright violation related to edible oil products. The plaintiff claimed that the defendant was using the deceptively similar mark 'Sun O Gold' on their product, mimicking the plaintiff's registered trademark 'Gold Winner' and its associated trade dress. Although the suit initially sought various permanent injunctions and damages, the parties ultimately reached a compromise.
M/s.Aarumugaa Industries Partnership Firm v.Murugan Metal
M/s.Aarumugaa Industries filed a civil suit against Murugan Metal alleging infringement of its registered trademark 'MURUGAN' and associated copyright. The plaintiff sought permanent injunctions, surrender of infringing stocks, and accounting of profits due to deceptive similarity in branding. Ultimately, both parties reached a compromise, leading the Madras High Court to decree the suit based on the terms of the memorandum.
M/s.Murugan Metal Industries v.Murugan Metal
M/s. Murugan Metal Industries filed a civil suit against Murugan Metal alleging infringement and passing off related to their registered trademark 'MURUGAN' and its associated artistic label. The plaintiffs sought permanent injunctions, destruction of infringing materials, and accounting of profits. Ultimately, both parties reached a compromise, leading the Madras High Court to decree the suit based on the terms of the memorandum of compromise.
M/s.Aarumgaa Industries v.Murugan Metal
M/s. Aarumgaa Industries filed a civil suit against Murugan Metal and others, alleging infringement of its registered trademark 'MURUGAN' and associated copyright. The plaintiff sought permanent injunctions to stop the use of similar marks and claims for damages related to passing off. Ultimately, both parties reached a compromise, leading the Madras High Court to decree the suit based on the terms of the memorandum of compromise.
M/S Laxmi Agro Impex India v.M/S Ladli India Commodities
The Delhi High Court admitted an appeal challenging a lower court's decision regarding trademark infringement. The core issue was that the Single Judge incorrectly compared the plaintiff's mark ('A') with a new defendant mark ('C'), instead of comparing it with the original relevant mark ('B'). Recognizing this procedural error, the Chief Justice granted a stay on the challenged order, preserving the status quo until the appeal is finally disposed of.
M/S Parle Products Pvt Ltd & Anr. v.M/S B&B Bake Pvt Ltd
The Delhi High Court overturned an injunction restraining the appellant from using 'AMERICANA' for butter cookies. The court held that since 'AMERICANA' is a common dictionary word, its legal protectability is lesser, especially when it is not registered exclusively by the plaintiff. Furthermore, the court found no prima facie case of passing off because the products (cookies vs. burger buns) had distinct looks and packaging, making consumer confusion unlikely. The matter was remanded for further proceedings.
M/s Elofic Industries (India) v.Mr. Viney Kumar Rai trading as Elofic Healthcare Pvt. Ltd.
The plaintiff, M/s Elofic Industries (India), a long-standing partnership concern dealing in filters, filed a suit alleging that the defendant, Mr. Viney Kumar Rai trading as Elofic Healthcare Pvt. Ltd., was infringing its trademark ELOFIC and passing off goods under similar names. The court found that the plaintiff successfully discharged the burden of proof regarding infringement.
Arun Chopra v.Kaka-Ka Dhaba Pvt Ltd & Ors
The Delhi High Court modified an existing interim injunction in the trademark infringement suit filed by Arun Chopra against Kaka-Ka Dhaba Pvt Ltd. While acknowledging the Plaintiff's prior use and reputation in Delhi, the court balanced this against the Defendants' established presence in Nashik. The final order permits the Defendants to continue operating their existing outlets under certain names but strictly prohibits them from opening new branches or using the name 'Kaka-Ka Hotel', ensuring a status quo while the main suit proceeds.
M/s.Ambika Appalam Company v.Nandi Food Products
M/s. Ambika Appalam Company filed a civil suit against Nandi Food Products, alleging infringement of its registered trademark 'AMBIKA APPLAM' and copyright over the associated artistic work and trade dress. The plaintiff sought perpetual injunctions and damages due to the defendant's use of similar labels like 'AMBUJA APPALAM'. However, before the court could rule on the merits, the plaintiff chose to withdraw the civil suit.
Shambhu Nath & Brothers & Ors. v.Usha International Limited
In this trademark dispute, Shambhu Nath & Brothers successfully secured a favorable outcome against Usha International Limited. The respondent company voluntarily agreed to withdraw its application for the trademark 'TOOFAN' and provided an affidavit undertaking that it would neither use nor register the mark, or any similar mark, in the future. Consequently, the court disposed of the suit based on this binding commitment.
M/s Kaleesuwari Refinery Private Limited v.M/s Anitha Marketing
M/s Kaleesuwari Refinery Private Limited filed a civil suit against M/s Anitha Marketing alleging infringement of its registered trademark 'Gold Winner' and copyright violation related to the packaging of edible oil. The plaintiff claimed that the defendant was using the deceptively similar mark 'The Gold Drops' and passing off inferior products as the plaintiff's brand. Both parties ultimately reached a compromise, leading the Madras High Court to decree the suit based on the terms of the memorandum.
M/s. Sangeetha Caterers and Consultants LLP v.Sangeetha Food Corner
The Madras High Court ruled in favor of M/s. Sangeetha Caterers and Consultants LLP against Sangeetha Food Corner for trademark infringement and passing off. The court found that the defendant's use of 'SANGEETHA FOOD CORNER' was identical and deceptively similar to the plaintiff's well-known registered trademark 'SANGEETHA'. Consequently, the suit was decreed, granting a permanent injunction against further misuse of the mark.
Bluechip Amusements (India) Pvt.Ltd. v.Crazy Concepts & Mazes Pvt.Ltd.
The Madras High Court ruled in favor of Bluechip Amusements, granting a perpetual injunction against Crazy Concepts & Mazes. The dispute centered on the use of the terms 'HORROR HOUSE' and 'HOUSE OF HORRORS' in the amusement industry. Despite the defendant claiming prior rights and trademark registration, the court found that the plaintiff had established continuous business operations under these names since 2008. Consequently, the court held that the defendant's caution notice was unjustified and groundless, protecting the plaintiff's business interests.
Glenmark Pharmaceuticals Ltd. v.Modi Mundipharma Beauty Products Private Limited
In this interim application, Glenmark Pharmaceuticals sought clarification regarding a previous court order concerning the use of the trademark 'CANDID'. The Bombay High Court addressed the request by formalizing an undertaking from Defendant No. 1. This ruling reinforces the immediate injunctive relief against the defendant, requiring them to cease importing or distributing goods under the disputed mark while the main litigation proceeds.
Nippon Life Sciences Private Limited v.S. R. Life Science And Anr.
The Bombay High Court addressed the ongoing ad-interim injunction in a trademark infringement suit concerning the mark 'EPILIGHT'. While the court noted that previous orders needed extension, it confirmed that the existing restraining order against the defendants for using deceptively similar marks would continue to operate until November 18, 2019. The matter was subsequently scheduled for further hearing.
Marico Limited v.Chandrakant Gholap
The plaintiff, Marico Limited, filed a Notice of Motion seeking various reliefs against the defendant, Chandrakant Gholap. The court granted leave to the Plaintiff and further granted prayer clause (d) of the Notice of Motion, which sought an injunction against the Defendant for using counterfeit PARACHUTE trade marks or trade dress in relation to edible oil preparations and other FMCG goods.
Marico Limited v.Chandrakant Gholap
Marico Limited filed a Notice of Motion seeking leave and an interim injunction against Chandrakant Gholap regarding the use of the PARACHUTE trade mark and trade dress. The Court granted the leave sought by the Plaintiff and further granted the prayer for an interim injunction, restraining the Defendant from manufacturing or distributing packaging materials bearing the infringing trademark/trade dress.
M/s Patanjali Biscuits Pvt Ltd v.Hatsun Agro Product Ltd.
This appeal before the Madras High Court addressed disputes concerning alleged trademark infringement and passing off between Patanjali Biscuits Pvt Ltd and Hatsun Agro Product Ltd. The core dispute revolved around the similarity of trademarks 'AROKYA' and 'AAROGYA', particularly in relation to biscuit products. While the lower court had vacated an interim injunction, the appellate court focused on the procedural aspect of a Summary Judgment application filed by the defendants. Finding that the Single Judge dismissed the summary judgment request without sufficient reasons under commercial courts law, the High Court allowed the appeal and remanded the matter for reconsideration.
Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited v.Kotak LLC
Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited filed a Notice of Motion against Kotak LLC alleging infringement and passing off concerning the registered trademark 'KOTAK'. The court granted temporary and permanent injunctions restraining the Defendant from using similar marks, names (like KOTAK LLC), apps (App KOTAK), and domain names (www.kotakapp.com) that are deceptive or identical to the Plaintiff's mark.
Asianet Star Communications Pvt Ltd. v.The Registrar Of Trademarks & Anr.
This Delhi High Court judgment addresses a dispute over the alleged abandonment of a registered trademark due to non-renewal. The petitioner argued that the mandatory O-3 notice for renewal was improperly backdated and uploaded using an outdated form (RG-3), making it invalid. The court recognized serious inconsistencies in the Trademark Registry's process, directing senior officials and the concerned Examiner to appear in court with explanations and documentation regarding the improper uploading of notices. Crucially, the court granted interim relief, ensuring the trademark would not be treated as abandoned pending a full inquiry.
Dharampal Satyapal Sons Private Limited v.Mr. Akshay Singhal & Ors.
The Delhi High Court ruled in favor of Dharampal Satyapal Sons Private Limited, declaring its candy brand 'PULSE' a well-known trademark. The court found that the plaintiff had established extensive goodwill and reputation both domestically and internationally through significant promotion and unique trade dress. Consequently, the defendants were restrained from manufacturing or selling similar products under deceptively similar marks like 'PLUSS', protecting the integrity of the PULSE brand.
M/s.Radiant Cash Management Services v.All in Pictures
M/s. Radiant Cash Management Services filed a suit against All in Pictures alleging infringement of its exclusive trademark, 'Radiant,' related to the screening of the film 'GORRILA.' The plaintiff sought permanent injunction and damages for the alleged misuse of the mark. However, during the hearing, the defendant submitted an affidavit stating that the matter had been settled out of court.
Facing a trademark dispute?
Arctic's TM litigation team handles ~120 trademark matters per year across India, EU, and UK. From oppositions to infringement actions, we build winning arguments from precedent.